So even taking the most cynical, Machiavellian POV, you'd suspect that the Pope isn't going to rear back and "declare and define" without a sense that "the Church", or a big chunk of it, is behind him. He may not need legions or divisions to back him up, but the heating bill at the Vatican has got to be heroic.
And at least on the two great Marian pronouncements, the Pope has not spoken without a lot of urging from the Church over time and space. So, I'm suggesting, FUNCTIONALLY it's like there's a charism given to the Church as a big, huge blob, and another charism given to the Successor of Peter as something like a pressure valve.
Fr. John Richard Neuhaus interestingly phrased the doctrine of Papal infallibility in negative terms. Not "Whatever the Pope says is true," but "The Pope won't 'declare and define' something that ain't so."
So it's not like the entire Church is sitting there like lumps until the Pope says something or other. It's more like everybody is saying, "Come on, say such and such," and then the Pope does or he doesn't.
That way his uniqueness is seen as not isolated, but part of a great, complicated, fermenting, and very alive mess -- which, after a little more than a decade of experience accords well with what the RCC looks like in real time.
To me this mitigates and renders a tad more palatable the idea of the Pope having special mojo. As a group we ALL have mojo, and the Pope is the "governor" in the mechanical sense.
I don't understand what you mean.
So, I'm suggesting, FUNCTIONALLY it's like there's a charism given to the Church as a big, huge blob, and another charism given to the Successor of Peter as something like a pressure valve.
OK, I can see that comparison in its intent. It matches what I have been told elsewhere. Even so, I would respectfully disagree on the need for a pressure valve.